Can there be recognition of what is - beyond any and all experiencing?

a reply to: dffrntkndfnml

I feel frustrated sometimes reading criticisms of spiritual lines of thought, when individuals entertain mysticism

I feel frustrated sometimes reading criticisms of mystical lines of thought, when individuals entertain spirituality


Is this a battle? Over words?
Frustration can be sublimated. Why do we attach so much emotion to others words. It will either resonate with your spirit or not. I know it sounds corny but as stated its all about LOVE

a reply to: AllIsOne

The table is always a table

and yet you say..

It remains to be seen what kind of AIs the AIs will create.

Is this a new religion? The cult of the AI

a reply to: AllIsOne

This is your statement

"Show me consciousness without a nervous system / brain and I might believe you."

My point being ... The brain and nervous system is stuff of the body
The nervous system and brain activity can be viewed BUT ... all that is occurring as such is viewing affect and not cause

In order to conclude something you must have the full picture ... which science does not have ... and as such is inconclusive of what the underlying cause is ... Measuring brain activity does not describe what is causing the activity ... or the signalling along the nervous system / brain

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

True, true.The root of that frustration lies in sharing in online communities where spiritual seekers lose balance to the right side of their minds, and those skeptical of religion and spirituality lose balance to the left side.This is not an issue for me anywhere except on the internet, but hey teleportation technology is still in the future.Lol, i prefer a more personal touch.

originally posted by: AllIsOne


Again, show me feeling without a nervous system/brain. Your thinking is highly circular. New Age mumbo jumbo doesn't add any substance to a discussion.

Consciousness IS unlimited Feeling is Love is Light. It is unqualified by any conditions.

You assume you are the body-mind as a priori knowledge, so my arguments appear circular to you. Drop that assumption and be who you are most fundamentally, then perhaps you will understand your true condition as self-Aware Consciousness, prior to but not separate from conditions.

originally posted by: AllIsOne
I'm not playing semantics. My kitchen table is a kitchen table. Case closed! What else do you think it is? That is so self-evident … lol.

So some words are actually what your kitchen table is? But it is called something different in other languages, so does that make it different?

What is it actually? No amount of description is ever going to give us that knowledge. You look at it from a certain point-of-view and it looks a certain way, but from any other pov it looks somewhat different. So no pov is actually what it is.

No amount of scientific understanding, even going into your table's molecular structure, is actually going to give you the knowledge of what it IS.

Really observe it - what is it? Only in your actual letting go of all your apparent separation from it as a subject over against it as an object can you gain such knowledge - but it is not conceptual nor perceptual.

Everything you experience is a psychic (perceptual) re-presentation of whatever object(s) you are viewing, hearing, etc. So clearly perception is not what it is.

So, what is it, in reality?

originally posted by: AllIsOne
Could it be possible that evolution has given us the right amount of senses to experience reality as it is?

Consider all experiences - you just said they are internal. They are all re-presentations that our nervous system and brain-mind create to survive in this apparent world of objects. But are those re-presentations actually what these objects are? Of course not. They are images, etc. of those apparent objects.

And we are not even experiencing those objects in the present as they appear currently. Everything we experience (perceive) takes time for the brain-mind to re-present - so the image of an object, for example, is quite possibly different from how the object NOW looks given the elapsed time. So we are actually only ever experiencing memories of such objects. An image of a distant star is a much older re-presentation of the star, as it currently exists. It may have even already disappeared by the time we perceive it!

Clearly none of these experiences are what these objects are in reality.

originally posted by: AllIsOne
... what is reality if there is no consciousness to experience it?

Reality is not dependent on conditions whatsoever. All conditions arise in Consciousness-Light (Reality), not the other way around. Consciousness is never separate from what arises, but is prior to what arises.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
[
The ever present aware space that you are is what all arises in/as - so of course it embraces all. It allows all there is to be - it does not have to be achieved, just realized. When it has been realized then what else is there?
When it is found that there is nothing but life happening, that all is just arising unconditionally there will be no blame or guilt for what appears - with no other to fear - it is the assuming of other which causes the love to be lost.
At the moment of separation paradise is lost - when wholeness is realized paradise is found. Paradise never went anywhere but there are words and ideas about there being 'something else'.
When the seeking ends, the seeker is no more and then there is just love/life.

Yes, I hear what you are saying, but it is also clear that the body-mind is embraced by Reality's inherent Force and changes more and more in conformity to Reality itself - which is Consciousness, Light, Love. When such signs are never spoken of or noticed, I suspect the speaker is only enjoying some kind of mental insight and is not fully experiencing Reality's transformation of his apparent body-mind.

Many on YouTube these days are examples of this - what is called the "stench of enlightenment" in the Zen Buddhist tradition. Such aspirants may make beautifully stated non-dual remarks, but seem locked up in the mind - not integrated as the whole body-mind, participating altogether in life, and showing real yogic signs of transformation by Reality that is Love.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight

So we've replaced god with a new god "Radiance"

LOL!
Not replaced - just another of the many descriptors. I like that word because it has an "active" sense to it - but generally I just say Light.

And by the way, welcome! Funnily enough, I was just thinking yesterday how I would enjoy hearing your perspectives on this thread. I even thought about sending you a u2u. I guess you didn't need one!

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
Personally I like how in the Old Testament god spoke and there was light and form. There is power in the spoken word

Yes, definitely. And the first part of John's Gospel:

"1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.…"

Interesting that John says that nothing came into being APART from Him. This again points to God's or Reality's indivisibility - that nothing is divorced or ultimately separate from Reality.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
but I don't want to derail the thread.

No worries about that. Please speak about this, if you want. I presumed this thread was dead a while back and suddenly it was resurrected by someone.

originally posted by: bb23108

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
[
The ever present aware space that you are is what all arises in/as - so of course it embraces all. It allows all there is to be - it does not have to be achieved, just realized. When it has been realized then what else is there?
When it is found that there is nothing but life happening, that all is just arising unconditionally there will be no blame or guilt for what appears - with no other to fear - it is the assuming of other which causes the love to be lost.
At the moment of separation paradise is lost - when wholeness is realized paradise is found. Paradise never went anywhere but there are words and ideas about there being 'something else'.
When the seeking ends, the seeker is no more and then there is just love/life.

Yes, I hear what you are saying, but it is also clear that the body-mind is embraced by Reality's inherent Force and changes more and more in conformity to Reality itself - which is Consciousness, Light, Love. When such signs are never spoken of or noticed, I suspect the speaker is only enjoying some kind of mental insight and is not fully experiencing Reality's transformation of his apparent body-mind.

Many on YouTube these days are examples of this - what is called the "stench of enlightenment" in the Zen Buddhist tradition. Such aspirants may make beautifully stated non-dual remarks, but seem locked up in the mind - not integrated as the whole body-mind, participating altogether in life, and showing real yogic signs of transformation by Reality that is Love.

The speakers you see and hear on youtube are not witnessed doing anything but speaking on youtube - so not sure how you can tell whether they are 'participating altogether in life'?
If the message is heard and entertained then it will shift the body and mind. When the mind is found to be just words and memories appearing in the ever present aware space what it speaks will not be taken seriously - so the mind is free to do what it likes - interest is lost in what it speaks when it speaks of me or other because it is known that it is just chatter appearing and disappearing just like all that appears. The speech mind will quiet down when there is no one found in there.
It is that which does not appear that is 'important' and when the unseen presence is known - it is felt as love (if you wish to name it something).
This is the trouble I think - naming it 'something' (love for example) makes it into 'something' - when it is not 'something' - it is nothing (as it cannot be seen, tasted, smelled, heard).
That which is hearing cannot be heard, That which is seeing cannot be seen .

Here is a great video I would like to share where Mooji encourages 'someone' to throw everything out so the nothing (the unseen presence) can be felt (direct conscious contact) instead of just hearing about it or reading about it (intellectual knowledge).

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

I meant our senses are passive detectors, they don't manipulate the world we perceive, thats what our hands are for.

a reply to: intrptr

our senses do manipulate the world as we perceive it

take our eyes for example, we cannot see all the spectrum of light, so our perception of reality is altered by our limitations, same with the ears, the nose and so on. Ultimate reality may not be affected, but conventional reality is definitely affected by our senses. They are what paint the picture for us and give us this sense of separate self, feedback, however limited or broad in our ability to sense. It is quite extraordinary!

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

haha yes! quite interesting isnt it? that is one of the speculations...

Terrence McKenna also thought that psychedelics, specifically mushrooms had a huge part in our evolution to understand symbols and language

a reply to: bb23108

It is interesting that god here is being equated with the word.

Could we perhaps see god as a manifestation of language? When we come up with language we begin by defining what is, then we evolve into defining what could be. So the thought of god could not be without language, thoughts and ideas can be different than experiential knowledge by way of imagination. Perhaps we see that all particulars have come into being by perspective of naming them from the ability to have language. So in a way, all things were created through him, and language itself is the grounds from which all particulars are named.

So what is god? Is there anything, even a supreme being, that is not impermanent? Also, a being is not a totality, and when we come to understand consciousness, it seems to always have limits by means of defining what we are looking at, so in a sense, consciousness itself is limited by its own mechanism of becoming, so any intelligence that has an active participation in something will always be limited by what it needs knowledge of. Going back to the idea of emptiness, if there is emptiness realized, then one is not stuck on static lines of reasoning and knowledge, but is open to move from one subject to the next without hindrances. So we see that this 'holy spirit' or active force of knowledge is a tool to be picked up and used and then dropped and left once the query and information has been understood. So in terms of intelligence or being, it springs up for a time, and then dissolves for a time, but that which is (totality of everything) is always there, but is there a function of knowing itself in totality? That seems to be in contradiction with the ability to know by definition and experience. It is the mind that creates and defines the boundaries.

"When people see some things as beautiful,
other things become ugly.
When people see some things as good,
other things become bad.

Being and non-being create each other.
Difficult and easy support each other.
Long and short define each other.
High and low depend on each other.
Before and after follow each other.

Therefore the Master
acts without doing anything
and teaches without saying anything.
Things arise and she lets them come;
things disappear and she lets them go.
She has but doesn't possess,
acts but doesn't expect.
When her work is done, she forgets it.
That is why it lasts forever."

- Tao Te Ching

originally posted by: preludefanguy
a reply to: intrptr

our senses do manipulate the world as we perceive it

take our eyes for example, we cannot see all the spectrum of light, so our perception of reality is altered by our limitations, same with the ears, the nose and so on. Ultimate reality may not be affected, but conventional reality is definitely affected by our senses. They are what paint the picture for us and give us this sense of separate self, feedback, however limited or broad in our ability to sense. It is quite extraordinary!

Exactly, and well said. You example hit home for me as I just had cataract surgery in one eye (the other one to be done in a few days), and the difference in my vision is enormous. Closing the fixed eye, the old eye sees all light colors, especially white, as a light shade of yellow.

If I close the unfixed eye, and open the fixed one, it is so very different! The color white is white now, not yellow. The only downside is I see much more detail in my older friends' faces, their wrinkles, etc., whereas before everyone looked beautiful, like an airbrushed 1930s sepia-toned movie.

a reply to: bb23108

it is difficult to measure such things

as one master put it

enlightenment is like the moon, and the clouds are the defilements, when the defilements are cleared then the moon shines through as it always has actually been there

so it is not that they do not 'possess' it, but rather, they still have some clouds hanging overhead

I do not see enlightenment as one defining moment, or ahah! but that seems to be the gate, and what lies on the other side is the continual dialog we have with life

one monk put it: "there are no enlightened beings, only enlightened activity"

a reply to: bb23108

oh what a process! what a great thing to live in the age where this is possible, I am glad for your ability to see better now

a reply to: preludefanguy
The idea of God is a manifestation of the language, and certainly the myth of the Creator-God was given manifestation through language. Isn't this the case for all myths? How else could they be communicated? Of course, we should be clear on our definition of language.

But the Reality of the Absolute God is beyond all language, all myth-making, and in fact, cannot be recognized via any intermediary - so I cannot assume the actual living unconditional Divine (Reality) is a manifestation of the language.

I do agree with you that language grants a particularity to objects through labeling them - but that is mostly about separating objects through the intellect. They are not truly separate in Reality, as everything is connected.

Language is generally more separative, it tends to create differentiation, the subject over against the object, etc. Once we learn a language, the stream of thinking almost never stops.

So I see language as a necessary tool for communication, but if not disciplined through real periods of meditation, etc., it takes over. People never stop talking, and are thinking incessantly. It reinforces the sense of separate self and keeps us distracted.

So language is important, and obviously has manifested the communication of endless ideas, etc. - but I don't equate it with God or the Word of God. It is a secondary, lower brain activity, every human learns early on, mainly for survival purposes.

But it certainly merits more discussion, as there are obviously sacred uses for language too.

originally posted by: artistpoet

My point being ... The brain and nervous system is stuff of the body
The nervous system and brain activity can be viewed BUT ... all that is occurring as such is viewing affect and not cause

In order to conclude something you must have the full picture ... which science does not have ... and as such is inconclusive of what the underlying cause is ... Measuring brain activity does not describe what is causing the activity ... or the signalling along the nervous system / brain

I think the tricky aspect, or the crux of this topic and subsequent dilemmas is that;

there is no 'solid rock of being';

which is what concepts and desires of there to be a spirit or soul, desires there to be;

A singular fundamental particle that is pure consciousness itself;

So the crux being, that consciousness in relation to substances mechanisms materials and systems which interact with systems in systems of systems around systems interacting with systems all of which possess greater and lesser moments of stability and scale;

That is consciousness the constantly fleeting interaction between multitudes of things?

Is consciousness the electricity itself? Or is it the electricity contacting other substance, or then is it the electricity itself and the other substance itself and the way in which it not only contacts at space and time x but also x1, x2, x3, x4, x5, x6 and so on... and also the way everything moves and changes both continually and discretely between x1 and x2 etc... And then to consider the true immensity as in scaling this analogy up to the billions of different sized parts of the brain and then all the material and movements and relationships outside the brain.

originally posted by: preludefanguy
a reply to: bb23108

oh what a process! what a great thing to live in the age where this is possible, I am glad for your ability to see better now

Yes! And thank you!

Medical advancements in these areas are mind-blowing.

Scientific-materialism certainly helps all of us with these matters - I just wish it would simply be what it is - a method for scientific discovery, rather than the dominant world view, with religious-like belief in it as the Truth. It makes for a very materialistically-oriented humanity.